I simply don't want to see a repeat of the 2016 match because I genuinely believe that a different challenger for Carlsen this time would produce more interesting chess.

I expect that is a widely held view, but should we be wishing for lots of exciting games, with Carlsen emerging comfortably as the winner, or a dour struggle with the match result in genuine doubt? I think the Champion should have to defend his title against the player with the best chance of beating him, and I think that player is Karjakin.

So you consider Karjakin to be a better match player or better from the last match? As viewers we should want exciting games rather than another 6 hour grind in a match that has a limited and rather dull opening repertoire.

As it stands Caruana has the best chance of beating Carlsen and plays some tactically sharp stuff also. Better that than another rendition of the Ruy Lopez marathon.

As viewers we should want exciting games rather than another 6 hour grind in a match that has a limited and rather dull opening repertoire.

I don't agree. All year round in elite tournaments I want to see exciting games. Once every two years I want to see the World Champion challenged for his title by a challenger using the most effective weapons for that purpose. If this leads to chess that ordinary players find unexciting to watch that is perhaps a problem for the game, but not something the participants should have to worry about.

They should act, primarily, out of self-interest for sure. But hoping someone renowned for his defensive abilities makes it through is, I think, a sad reflection. The consensus overall was that the last match was dull, even the far from ordinary commentators were struggling at points. I take your point about the level of competitiveness but when the predictability of what lies ahead outranks that, I personally prefer a less competitive match with more action. I was, like so many, hoping that Aronian would make it through. I think Carlsen will be very comfortable with the prospect of another match against Karjakin and won't be at his best as a result.

I think what Tim is saying here is what many people think. The last match was bad enough. If Carlsen is not careful he'll go down as a rather uninspiring champion despite how truly great he is. It took me many years to get to the point where I could play through Petrosian's world championship games because he was labelled like that. It would be a shame if Carlsen is remembered for all the wrong reasons...

Botvinnik was, in my opinion, the most correct of all about what made for a great world championship match. You can find the interview in the 25th Anniversary edition of New In Chess. When asked about the upcoming Karpov v Kasparov match he said that the most important thing for a great match was a clash of temperaments. With that in mind, another Karjakin match is the last thing the chess world wants.